Machar signed his Death Warrant as Pres. Kiir refused to shake his hand for peace

We have watched the signing of the mockery peace agreement with great concern, since this peace agreement is not going to prevail as it is not addressing the root causes of the conflict.

Some may think that the problem is only between SPLM-IO leader, Riak Machar and South Sudan president Salva Kiir, but the problem is between the Kiir government with the people of South Sudan; because the government of South Sudan has let their own people down.

Instead of focusing on development and services for the people of South Sudan, Kiir turned to nepotism, uprooting other tribes from their land and relocating his tribe into other peoples’ places.

As a result, some tribes such as people of Western Bhar El Ghazal rebelled in 2012 against the Salva Kiir Regime. By that time, Riak Machar was still the first Vice President and he then supported Kiir’s policy toward people of Western Bhar El Ghazal.

In 2013 when the fight broke out between Kiir and Machar, Machar was expelled from Juba and he became a rebel. The people of Western Bahr El Ghazal thought “the enemy of their enemy was their friend.”

Now they know they were wrong, as Machar only focuses on his personal interests and does not care about the people. Many people from the ethnic group of Machar have been killed, yet he does not think about their lives, their families, or communities in general.

Some of Western Bahr Ghazal’s people joined Machar based on the following conditions:
1. The policy of Wau County’s move to Baggari must be reversed
2. The annexing of Raga to Awiel must be reversed
3. Wau and Raga must remain as one state as pre-independence from Sudan in 2005
4. There must be an adaptation of the federation of governance in South Sudan so that every group can work to develop their state
5. Accountability must be taken against those who are responsible for the killing and raping of innocent civilians in Western Bhar El Ghazal.

Now Machar is signing the so-called peace agreement without putting into consideration what the people of Western Bhar El Ghazal agreed to when they decided to cooperate with him.

He has not condemned the attacks following the ceasefire agreement and their counties are currently under attack. As they are signing the agreement, Salva Kiir is still attacking people in Baggari, Bringi, Mboro, Beselia, Bazia, Raga, Dulu, Mangayat, and Demzubier… etc.

The participants of the Khartoum so-called ‘Khartoum Peace Talks’ have never honoured any agreement…. we saw this in 2015. We also saw this with the 2016 agreement, as well as the ceasefire agreement that was recently signed in July of 2018.

They violated these agreements many times in Equatoria, Western Bhar el ghazal and Upper Nile.

Machar needs to understand that he is signing an agreement with a culprit. Salva Kiir has never honoured any agreement. Machar believes he is signing a peace agreement, but to Salva Kiir, Machar is signing his death warrant, as Salva Kiir refused to shake his hand for peace during the ceremony.

5 Comments

President Salva Kirr,and Dr.Riak Machar,are take the government affairs as personal animonsity! What I have seen now,they are not suppose to trust themselves at all!

If President Salva Kirr,had refused to shake and with Dr.Machar Riak,well,it is not a big deal for me at all at this point! Let Riak Machar,DISREGARD TOTALLY! Let him continue talkting the peace with President Salva Kirr for the problem of the people of South Sudan Republic all along with non stop! Him,Salva Kirr,he is worrying his own DEATH WARRANT! This is the reason why he is siding with the common enemies in Khartoum regime in central in north to according him protection like the way he has done already..He redepoloyed The Sudan Armed Forces and SPLA in Oil Fields in Bentiu in the South Sudan! Thanks sir! There is no peace in the country in South Sudan under President Salva Kirr rule!

Nicolas,
The idea that the current peace doesn’t address the root causes of conflicts for all South Sudanese warring parties is debatable, considering the various movements or parties, each of them have their political reasons why they have rebelled against Juba government.
Therefore, for those who have signed the agreement their reason of rebellion has be addressed, most of these members of the rebels were SPLM government officials and for the reason known to the president they were dismissed.
While in government they had never disapproved government’s activities, they were looting government fund together. Unexpectedly, when they lost their positions, were able to point out government’s corruption.
Had they resigned from their positions, because they don’t want to be part of corrupt government, one would agree your proposition that, the “current peace doesn’t address the root cause of conflict.”
It may be true for some parties that have not signed the agreement, but not for everyone. For those who rebelled because they lost their position in government, this agreement has given their position back.
I do understand many would argue giving peace chance, which is true, but realistically the current peace is a Joke.
My personal concern is not about Salva refused to shake hand with Riek, but the governance system that would be implemented as part of the agreement. It is a disgrace that the country is going from bad to worse, South Sudan got its independence from Sudan with ten States and the government was struggling to provide services for these ten states.

The governments positions are dominated with foreign consultants, because not enough skilled South Sudanese to fill the positions. What has changed in South Sudan for the president to increase the number of states to 32.

Where are we going to find the skills to fill the public service positions, the president argued that the citizens demanded the 32 states. Does this mean if your ten year-old child wants to move out of home, because he/she has asked for.
As a parent you should grant the permission? though you know they would not survive on their own.
Right now, it’s lucky if some of these states have a single doctor and community health centre, let alone a hospital.

Without doubt the solution to our problems is dividing the country into three nations or at least confederations.

All that matters to the protagonists of this war is “POWER: not the people.

One can only guess that more blood loss is forthcoming.

We have no trust among ourselves, others are too much ahead while some too behind the civilization ladder.

Having moved all over the country, its almost unimaginable that the rulers have completely forgotten their mission to develop their people, they sit in Juba, Nairobi, Kampala etc, feasting on the loot while their mothers, brethren live in very pitiful situation under the mercy of UN. What a shame!!!

Some of these guys barking in this forum are not even ashamed to brag in USA, Australia as the rulers of South Sudan when in effect back home their parents are stinking like hell, begging, dying of curable diseases.

My friend what do you mean, dividing the country into three nations, you must be out of your mind, up to when we would keep dividing the country. We need to learn conflict resolution, not every conflict means we should divide, nation building is not easy, ups and downs is normal would happen, but this does not mean we can’t stay together. Inequality is not a problem only in South Sudan, it’s a worldwide problem is a product of capitalism, we can overcome this by government investments in education and developing agricultural industry and job creation for citizens. If employment is available inequality would gradually improve, remember South Sudan is rich of unexplored resources. A proper government with vision for the country would change the country within few years and this problem of leadership disputes would disappear. Therefore, my friend do not be afraid, this issues would come to pass and people of South Sudan one day will respect and trust each other as citizen and standing together to build their country. Long live the unity of South Sudanese and short live tribal sentiment and divisions.